Caracas Chronicles

Last week, we had the closest thing to an October Surprise, the belief that during the last month of the U.S election something happens that alters the dynamic of the race. During a rally in Madison Square Garden, comedian Tony Hinchcliffe, delivered a joke where he referred to Puerto Rico as an “island of garbage” causing widespread alarm among the Boricua population in the U.S. However, a moment of the rally that hasn’t been thoroughly discussed stood out to me. Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s immigration policy and a key player in his potential next administration, emphasized the shift from “America First” to something closer to “Americans Only.”

This was the latest iteration of a process of demonization of migrants that has been a staple of the Trump campaign. This time, the focus is on Venezuelan migrants, who have been equated with criminals. A sharp departure from the rhetoric used in 2019, when he referred to Venezuela as a “rallying cry” to strengthen freedom around the world. What happened? 

Now that Trump has nearly even odds of winning the presidency again, revisiting this figure and his relationship to populism feels essential because, over the last four years, he has become more authoritarian and more populist. 

After almost three decades of continuous exposure to populism in Venezuela, it’s easy to recognize when something feels populist. There’s a series of red flags and vibes that signal it. 

Trump’s usage of Venezuela is an example of many of this change. Yet, to analyze it correctly, we need a definition. Dutch scholar Cas Mudde has provided one of the most widely accepted definitions of populism in contemporary political science. He defines it as a “thin-centered” ideology, one that attaches to other existing ideologies in a host-parasite relationship, that envisions a society divided into two groups: the “pure people” and the “corrupt elite,” with political outcomes ideally reflecting the general will of the people. In this vision, the populist leader is the only one capable of enacting that will.

After almost three decades of continuous exposure to populism in Venezuela, it’s easy to recognize when something feels populist. There’s a series of red flags and vibes that signal it.

Trump’s rhetoric evoked the hawkish approach to international relations that has characterized the GOP. Regarding Venezuela, in 2019 his administration applied heavy sanctions on Nicolás Maduro’s regime, welcomed Juan Guaidó to the State of the Union address, and even hinted at military action with the phrase “all options are on the table”. Trump’s rhetoric throughout was full of the classic populist “us vs. them” sentiment, a key component in Mudde’s definition of populism, but as a rallying cry that reframed “the people” as those who love democracy and “the corrupt elite” as the regimes opposing it. 

Trump and his team continued to invoke Venezuela in ways that hollowed out classical Republican policy. In an infamous press conference, Trump’s attorney Sidney Powell claimed that the US election in 2020 was stolen thanks to software allegedly created “under the direction of Hugo Chávez.” Since then, the discourse around Venezuela in Trump’s campaign shifted dramatically, transforming from a bipartisan cause for democracy into a fearful, ominous threat. This slow shift culminated in Trump’s latest framing of Venezuela as an active danger. 

The campaign’s proposed mass deportation initiative, code-named Operation Aurora after the scandal about the supposed Tren De Aragua takeover of a building in Colorado, further underscores this process of demonization.

It makes political sense. His demonization of migrants, including those fleeing Venezuela’s humanitarian crisis, by casting them as criminals and falsely claiming that Caracas is safer than American cities, is not a new tactic. In fact, Trump famously referred to Mexicans as rapists when he first announced his candidacy in 2015. Now, as he courts Latino voters, where he is performing better than in previous years, he aims to reframe “the people” to include them, and other minority voters, in his vision for the future of the U.S. To do, he turns the spotlight on Venezuelans, a demographic with limited political influence. 

The campaign’s proposed mass deportation initiative, code-named Operation Aurora after the scandal about the supposed Tren De Aragua takeover of a building in Colorado, further underscores this process of demonization. 

This has left Venezuelan migrants particularly vulnerable, as they have been cast in Trump’s rhetoric as symbolic of the supposed threats facing the U.S. Yet, Trump himself continues to cozy up with other autocrats and reportedly has even praised Nicolás Maduro’s strength. If he is to win on Tuesday, there’s no evidence that this trend will be reversed. In addition to the tangible threat of mass deportations, a next Trump administration is unlikely to take the Venezuela crisis seriously and with a growing need of a scapegoat as he consolidates power, Venezuelans will become perpetual outcasts in his authoritarian project.